Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 5–23 | Cite as

How learning to become a teacher-researcher prepared an educator to do science inquiry with elementary grade students

Article

Abstract

This autobiographical case study describes the development of the practices and perspectives of one elementary school teacher as she engaged in teacher-as-researcher methodology in both urban and suburban settings. Re-visiting a collection of teacher journals, transcribed audiotapes, student work samples, parent communications, and artifacts in teacher and student portfolios identifies multiple outcomes of this reflective and reflexive professional stance. The case study documents how teacher-as-researcher engagements provided the framework for an elementary teacher to begin to explore science inquiry within an elementary school setting. This autobiographical tale documents how teacher-as-researcher practices enabled students, parents, and educators to become co-learners, co-teachers, and co-researchers in science education and the science of education.

Keywords

Science Education Grade Student Classroom Practice Classroom Teacher Science Curriculum 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993).Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Blazer, B. (1986). “I want to talk to you about writing”: 5-year old children speak. In B. Schieffelin & P. Gilmore (Eds.),The acquisition of literacy: Ethnographic perspectives (pp. 75–109). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Boomer, G. (1987). Addressing the problem of elsewhereness: A case for action research in schools. In D. Goswami & P. R. Stillman (Eds.),Reclaiming the classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  4. Botel, M., & Seaver, J. A. (1986).Language arts phonics A—Strategies for decoding and spelling. New York: Scholastic Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Bruun, R., & Bruun, B. (1982).The human body. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  6. Calkins, L. (1997).Raising lifelong learners. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  7. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986).Becoming critical. Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1993).Inside/outside. New York: Teacher's College Press.Google Scholar
  9. Denzin, N. K. (1997).Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Duckworth, E., Easley, J., Hawkins, D., & Henriques, A. (1990).Science education: A minds-on approach for the elementary years. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Dyasi, H. (1998, August 15). Inquiry description [On-line serial]. Available http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/inquirydesc.htmlGoogle Scholar
  12. Faubl, J. (1994).Classroom observation report. Haddonfield, NJ: Haddonfield Public Schools.Google Scholar
  13. Gardner, H. (1991).The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  14. Glasersfeld, E. von (1988).Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  15. Grundy, S. (1987).Curriculum: Product or praxis. Philadelphia: Falmer.Google Scholar
  16. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989).Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  17. Habermas, J. (1987).Knowledge and human interests. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995).Ethnography. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Harlen, W. (1996).The teaching of science in primary schools. London: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  20. Harlen, W. (Ed.). (1985).Primary science… taking the plunge. Oxford: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  21. Hawkins, D. (1965). Messing about in science.Science and Children, 5(2), 5–9.Google Scholar
  22. Hoh, D. (1994, December 13). Weather science.Courier Post, C8.Google Scholar
  23. Jelly, S. (1985). Helping children raise questions and answering them. In W. Harlen (Ed.),Primary science… taking the plunge (pp. 47–57). Oxford: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  24. Kelly-Byrne, D. (1989).A child's play life: An ethnographic study. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kincheloe, J. L. (1998). Critical research in science education. In B. Fraser, & K. Tobin (Eds.),International handbook of science education (pp. 1191–1205). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Macrorie, K. (1988).The I-search paper. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  27. Marek, E., & Cavello, A. (1997).The learning cycle. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  28. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1995).Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  29. McGonigal, J. (1983).Journal of a second grade teacher. Unpublished manuscript. Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  30. McGonigal, J. (1984).What role does acting play? Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  31. McGonigal, J. (in press). How students, a teacher, and parents began co-constructing a primary classroom culture that made the development of the learning environment an explicit component of the school curriculum.Learning Environments Research: An International Journal.Google Scholar
  32. Mezzacappa, D. (1998, November 26). Good teachers? Hard to define.The Philadelphia Inquirer, pp. A1, A10.Google Scholar
  33. National Research Council. (1996).National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  34. Odell, L. (1987). Planning classroom research. In: D. Goswami, & P. R. Stillman (Eds.),Reclaiming the classroom: Teacher research as an agency for change (pp. 128–160). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  35. Pottenger, F. (1996). Constructing knowledge: A science community model.Science Education, 15, 3–5.Google Scholar
  36. Pottenger, F. M., & Pottenger, L. M. (1994).Grade 4 teacher guide: Developmental approaches in science and health. Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research & Development Group University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
  37. Putnam, L. (1991). Dramatizing nonfiction with emerging readers.Language Arts, 68, 463–469.Google Scholar
  38. Saul, W., & Reardon, J. (Eds.). (1996).Beyond the science kit. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  39. Schaller, J. S., & Tobin, K. (1998). Quality criteria for the genres of interpretive research. In J. A. Malone, B. Atweh, & J. R. Northfield (Eds.),Research in supervision in mathematics and science education (pp. 39–60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Schön, D. (1983).Reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books, Inc.Google Scholar
  41. Short, K., Harste, J., & Burke, C. (1996).Creating classrooms for authors and inquirers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  42. Spinelli, J. (1997).Ideas for inquiry investigation. Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  43. Tobin, K. (1995). Teacher change and assessment of performance. In B. Fraser, & H. Walberg (Eds.),Improving science education (pp. 145–170). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978).Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986).Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Revised Trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Whitin, P., & Whitin, D. (1997).Inquiry at the window. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Science Education Research Association 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Science and Mathematics Education CentreCurtin University of TechnologyPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations